Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review

The E-M1 is the second model in Olympus's OM-D series and extends the range further into semi-pro/enthusiast territory. There are two main distinctions that set the E-M1 apart from its little brother (the E-M5) - a more sophisticated autofocus system and a 'buttons for everything' design approach. As such the two models will coexist, with the E-M1 sitting at the very top of Olympus's lineup.

The biggest technological step forward on the E-M1 is the addition of on-sensor phase detection elements, giving the camera two distinct focus modes. The phase-detection system is used when lenses from the original Four Thirds system, which were designed for use that way, are attached. With native, Micro Four Thirds lenses, the camera will mainly stick with the contrast detection system that has proved so fast and accurate on the E-M5. Only if you use tracking AF will the camera utilize phase-detection information with a Micro Four Thirds lens.

The E-M1 also gains the excellent 2.3M-dot electronic viewfinder panel we first saw as the VF-4 accessory for the PEN E-P5. Not only is the resolution very impressive, but the viewfinder optics give a viewfinder with magnification of up to 1.48x (depending on display mode), which puts it only a fraction behind the 0.76x viewfinder in Canon's 1D X and ahead of Nikon's pro-grade D4 DSLRs.

There's also a more advanced 'TruePic VII' processor in the E-M1 that conducts a variety of lens corrections, when creating JPEGs, leading the company to proclaim the best image quality offered by one of its cameras. Not only can the E-M1 remove the colour fringing caused by lateral chromatic aberration, Olympus says that it also tunes its sharpening to take into account the lens's sharpness, and to combat any softening due to diffraction (particularly at very small apertures).

The biggest difference between the E-M1 and the E-M5, though, is the degree of direct control on offer. We really liked the E-M5's twin-dial control system, but the E-M1 goes beyond that by providing button-and-dial combinations for quickly changing almost every imaginable setting on the camera. It's the kind of approach you don't usually get until the very top of manufacturers' lineups - it means you have to get used to where every function is, but can shoot fluidly once you have.

The E-M1 inherits the '2x2' dial approach Olympus previously used on the E-P5 - flicking a switch on the camera changes the dials from controlling shutter speed, aperture or exposure compensation to changing ISO and white balance. However, all this direct control doesn't come at the expense of the potentially slower but easier to find touch-screen interface - the E-M1 has this too. Overall the camera can be operated pretty much however you fancy.

Built-in Wi-Fi for remote shooting and image transfer to smartphone or tablet

Dust, splash and freeze-proof (to -10 °C)

Gained over the E-M5

True Pic VII processor, with lens corrections

1/8000 sec top shutter speed, 1/320 sec flash sync

Built-in microphone socket (rather than optional accessory adapter)

Flash X-sync socket

Built-in Wi-Fi

Focus 'peaking' display

In-camera HDR blending (two modes), previewed in viewfinder

Four Thirds is dead. Long live Four Thirds.

As well as representing the highest-end Micro Four Thirds camera yet, the E-M1's role is also about offering continued support for users of the original Four Thirds SLR system. Olympus created some very nice Four Thirds lenses, but the company struggled to make enough impact in the SLR market to justify the cost of continuing development for both systems in parallel.

The company claims to have studied what the E-M1 and a hypothetical 'E-7' SLR could offer, and concluded that, while image quality, durability and speed would have been the same, the OM-D design allowed both a substantial size advantage and a much greater viewfinder magnification than would be possible with an optical finder. As such the E-M1 should be considered the successor to the E-5.

We'll look at the performance of the camera with Four Thirds lenses in a little more depth later in this article. But in principle, the on-sensor phase detection autofocus system should be much more effective than contrast detection when it comes to controlling Four Thirds lenses, all of which were primarily designed to be driven by phase detection-based systems.

Comments

All (2072)

Most popular (15)

Editors' picks (0)

DPR staff (25)

Oldest first

(unknown member)

memo to those who think they know, but don't, and still post nonsense:

Micro (m) = Lens Mount4/3 = Sensor

There is no such thing as a m4/3rd's "sensor." All 4/3rd's sensor cams are 4/3rds cams--it's that the micros have a smaller lens mount to accommodate the mirrorless/EVF design, while 4/3rds cameras have a larger lens mount to accommodate pentaprism/mirror OVF designs.

I would imagine either of them will be more than competent for portraiture, whether studio based or not. I'm using my EM-5 for this (with either my 35-100 f2.8 or the kit 12-50, my copy of which produces lovely studio portraits)

Haven't had a chance to use the EM-1 but can't wait to try out the ISO100 option :)

In the studio the 75 f1.8 will be a bit long, even for head and shoulder shots but for open air work it will be superb, based on what I have seen in the way of results on the web

Hi. I was able to try out an Em-1 in a studio .with both the 45 1.8 and 75mm 1.8. I did not find the 75mm f1.8 too long at all and it takes fantastic pictures. It really is a superb lens. I really preferred it to the 45mm f1.8.

I would say that yes, it depends on how big your studio is, but in fact, really it's more a question of how far back you want the backdrop to be in case you do not want light spill from the strobes. If your subject has to be 2-3m (or 10-12ft) forward from the backdrop, then yes, it can be tight to frame the 75mm prime in a small-ish studio, for a half-length portrait.

The 45mm is really a stellar performer, you can't go wrong with it for all the right reasons, and the next step up I probably prefer from a FL point of view, is the 60mm Oly macro lens if you ever need to consider it. This is a brilliantly sharp and color/distortion free lens. A perfect 120mm equivalent FL lens for studio portraiture.

ACR 8.2 will process the E-M1's files. One workaround may be to download the latest version of Adobe's DNG Converter and convert the ORFs to DNG, which previous versions of ACR will then recognise and convert.

there is no format that I have to defend, though smaller sensors have problems at base ISOs and lenses should be held accountable for high ISOs.

I don't really judge on ISO settings for it's not something that can be carried across cameras or formats. that I really mean exposures. optimum ISO settings should be used for technical reasons specific to each camera and that's all (and there are ISO-less sensors).

Actually, after a couple weeks of shooting one, I don't think I've used such a good base iso performer before. Very flexible raws, good color control, little to no shadow noise (at iso 100 I can't see any) and great detail.

Curiously, low light image P9161521 at ISO1600 is surprisingly noisy, albeit quite detailed, whereas other shots at ISO6400 are surprisingly clean and well processed. Perhaps this is the "fault" of the NR processor rather than the sensor. Overall I am very impressed by the image quality however.

Again looking at the DPR comparison look at the Color Checker chart the blue square at ISO 200 RAW there should be no noise but there is. Sure if you shoot JPEG, Oly takes care of it or if you shoot RAW you can turn on NR but at base ISO one should be able to shoot RAW and process without NR and get clean results. I just don't see it.

According to the noise comparison sample by dpreview. E-M1 high ISO noise performance is poorer than E-M5 and GX7. Why doesn't dpreview point it out in the article?

EM-1 has better ergonomics, better control, and better continuous AF. However, it looks like an entry level D-SLR camera, very ugly, and its noise level is higher than other competitors. Why do I pay more for a camera with more ugly appearance and poorer noise level?

So why do the high iso E-M1 Raw files when compared to the E-M5 and GX7 have less blue noise in the tungsten lit tests?

Also go into a shop and pickup the camera. You will then understand what makes it so good. Much better made and far better ergonomics than any entry level camera. In fact build quality wise it compares to the D4 and top end Canon.

I tried this before in an Olympus event. The ergonomics is excellent. The body built is excellent. However it's meaningless to put a small sensor in such a big body. The kit F2.8 lens is huge, too. I love the original OM1 design. This one is not my cup of tea.

Andy Spawn you cannot have decent build quality without an increase in size. If you love the OM1 why not the E-M1? I have put my OM-3 with small hand grip next to the E-M1 and there is hardly any difference in size. The 12-40 f2.8 is not huge when you consider the build quality and performance plus the fact it is sealed.

If you built a Sony A7 to the same standard as the E-M1 is would be larger. As it is the build is still down from a E-M5 and the E-M5 is smaller.

at least I've seen no OM-1 that lasted long, which was the very reason that made it popular ... low cost. there was a sizeable market for the repairing of OMs and some small Japanese shops provided better service than Oly at much cheaper prices (a well backstreet-refurbished OM-1 used to be sold as low as 100 dollars with 50mm prime).

My OM-2n (new in 1982) and OM4ti are both still going strong despite being carried in bike panniers, handlebar bags and rucksacks on cycling and walking holidays. Don't get so much use now; but in my experience the build quality is fantastic.

I like it so much, but $ 2500 is a lot for me (EM 1 body + 12-40mm f/2.8).

Because the idea of kick the heavy 5D M. III is not so obvious... I would like to keep the Canon at least some time and only if the Oly conquers my heart and my printer, well "hasta la vista, Canon". But, right now, the Oly cracks my wallet and my heart.

No scratch that, skip the EM1 if size matters to you, go for the Panasonic GM1 or the Olympus EPM2 with a couple of good m43 primes. Twice as small as the EM1 at a fraction of the price of the full EM1 kit.

Personally, at least if I were already in m43 I would buy the lens before I bought the body. It is a terrific lens, and for me the big limitation of the system until this point has been the lack of a good wide zoom lens.

One of the main attraction of the EM1 is the new 12-40 f/2.8 kit lens. It is probably the best standard zoom lens for Micro 4/3. Optically, it is superb and the built quality is the best so far. I would definitely buy this lens if I do not have a standard zoom for micro 4/3.

Get a cheaper Micro 4/3 body to start it off. Currently, there are a few to choose from. The GF5 is about $300, the GX1 is about $400 and so are the older Olys. One can also consider the EM5 body. Use it as a travel camera.

I would keep the 5DMk3 for the more critical shots when top image quality is expected.

FACT - m4/3 sensor is approx 33% smaller in area than an APS-C sensor or just slightly more than 1/2 a stop. Not significant really when you consider that there are other factors that contribute to noise on the final image. Small price to pay for much smaller kit. EM-5 looks to be brilliant value now but EM-1 price will come down.

It reinforces how badly these forums and comments sections are deteriorating. I am not sure why anyone bothers to comment on cameras that they dont own, or use, or have any experience with. Frankly, who would be interested in their opinion ? I have largely given up asking questions on DPR, as more often than not the responses are subjective opinion from god knows who ? The needs of everyone here are vastly different. If punter A feels that the combination of a small camera and lens, with fast autofocus, useless tracking and a small sensor is not for them, but they have never actually used the system, then who is interested in their view ??

I wouldn't ask anybody for their opinion when I want to buy a certain camera. It is unlikely I would get a suitable or correct answer. One just need to know what you want and go for it. Lenses may be slightly easier. Always go for professional grade lenses and don't complain about the prices. Good things are never cheap.

Everybody have different needs, budget constraints, level of competancy and degree of seriousness in pursuing photography. A camera so loved by one maybe totally unsuitable for another. For example, if I would like to shoot MotoGP I would need a Pro camera like the Canon 1DX and the 500mm f/4.0 L IS and a monopod. For me, it is a "must have" combo eventhough it may be expensive. For the newbie, it is definitely too expensive. He might not even know how to use it. For a casual consumer trying to learn photography, all he need is an entry level DSLR. The housewife going on holiday may just want a simple P&S. Anything else will be too complicated.

This camera was rumored for years, and I admit that I did not think that Olympus would ever actually get around to making it. I sort of gave up and thought the worst, I confess.

But they made it, and it looks like a seriously capable instrument. Controls, indeed. I have always had a preference for EVF's. I wonder if I would feel overwhelmed by it all, the learning curve ...

If I had the moolah to get into any system right now, without a doubt, it would be this one. So, from this here longtime fan: Well done, Olympus! I hope you succeed and keep this system alive and strong. I will get one someday.

Actually I think there is nothing easier than a large and bright high quality EVF, and likely this camera gives great results in fully automatic point and shoot mode, where most people create their best pictures :-)

Not everyone wants to deal with fixed lens camera, a fairly big one no less, when they already have an interchangeable lens camera. I know I wouldn't.

If you think the native F2.8 zooms are too pricey/big on m43, you can always fall back on the kit zooms or on primes. If none of this is satisfactory then maybe you're better off with a fixed lens camera after all though maybe not those like the Stylus 1.

Oh, here we go again with the FF nonsense. Go ahead and compare the Sony A7 against the feature-rich E-M1. And, yes, the E-M1 can even take great landscape shots. The world does not begin and end with FF.

Not to pile, on but full framed cameras often, not always, have a problematic relationship with lenses mostly designed for film 35mm SLRs. Olympus (and the Leica S system) completely redid the lenses so the light falling on the sensor is perpendicular to the sensor plane across the entire sensor.

I imagine the new lenses for the Sony A7 work out most of the vignetting problems too.

Now: The Sony A7 is a plenty interesting system. But the shutter is incredibly loud for a mirrorless system, it is not built to withstand weather the way this Olympus is. And right now there are more lenses for the Olympus system–more than a few of the Olympus lenses begin to rival Leica and Zeiss optically.

With firmware, Sony may be able to quiet the A7 system at lower shutter speeds, and of course the Sony does good video. But these two A7s are first tries by Sony.

"FF" - so called "full frame" is so arbitrary! It's a size that worked as a good compromise for lots of users in film days. If you took all the arguments that said a 35mm sensor was better than a 4/3 sensor, logic dictates an even bigger sensor would be even better, yet that section of the market is tiny.

Wake up, skeptics. 4/3 is a very, very good compromise between size and quality. In fact, it is barely a compromise at all, being good enough for nearly every use!

The difference between the 'quarter-sized' m43 sensor and 'full-frame' sensor is less than people think. Same goes for camera size. (Human hand actually dictates the lower limit). I would love a Sony A7R with some sharp lenses, but then I remember, I don't print much landscape wallpapers...

Also, grips go a long way in determining camera application (e.g., hiking around and/or using large lenses imparts a need for a substantial grip). In this sense, the A7 is, in fact, properly compared to the EM1, not the EM5 -- unless you're imaging the latter's accessory grip, which then changes both weight and cost comparisons.

Micro 4/3 is popular because it provide acceptable quality in a smaller size camera especially when most people would not print bigger than A3. The cost of buying the camera is also cheaper.

However, it remain a camera for hobbyist / enthusiast but not real professional photographers. Have anyone see many professional photographers like journalist and commercial photographers using Micro 4/3?

Micro 4/3 is a convenient size for most people but for critical photography, I would use a larger format, 35mm full frame or medium format.

What you mean to say is, in specific applications and use cases you'd use a medium format or full frame. Because I honestly don't know any photogs lugging around a medium format to shoot events/weddings; which are the realm of FF, APSC and more recently, more photogs opting to use the OMD's for weddings.

The term "critical photography" is a loaded term and can't mean the same thing for other types of photographers. Different tools for different uses. ALL camera equipment is a limited tool best used in certain situations and not others.

The only thing that determines critical photography is the type of photography and the use case. It's a great thing we have a range of tools to choose from; the smallest to the biggest.

"Comparing the E-M1 to the APS-C Canon EOS 70D in low light, you'll notice that the Canon DSLR handles the warm tungsten lighting a bit better than the E-M1, which has given the whole scene an amber tint."

Hint - if you don't like it to show what it actually gets (i.e. very warm light), turn Keep Warm Color off.

Tungsten bulbs... I guess they are still used - probably by the same people who still use DSLRs. I personally started switching from halogen and fluorescent to LED bulbs where appropriate (directional lights). Unfortunately, fluorescent lights don't burn out as often as tungsten, so the switch goes slow...

I see that this m43 sensor has less noise than the nikon d7100, just per the measurments chart by DP. Thera are several places on the net you can find tons of pictures which are comparable quality as the best DSLR can produce. It is not at the level of Fuji system (regarding noise only) but surely better than many of consumer DSLR. And the system as the whole is small.If somebody needs large FF DSLR with some gain of quality that is fine but compactness of the system will be in a different ligue! For those who think FF is large sensor system let me remoinf you that this was called small format in the old days and still there are mid and large format cameras these days. Why do not you take these tools for consideration? Can you accept the FF small sensor? Why? BECAUSE OF PORTABILITY! Same logic would apply for the Oly.

Not being that technical, I was trying to compare this camera to the Fuji xPro 1 in the image comparisons page . At lower ISO's the Olympus seems to have better resolution. My question is: xPro 1 has APS-C sensor, Olympus is Four Thirds. Both have the same MP count (16 MP) yet the Olympus files are nearly twice as big as far as MB size is concerned. Can Someone explain this?

To see how much information is in the picture itself, and how much is in the exif information file, shoot the same shot with different cameras, and then you open simply the jpeg files in windows Paint, save them and close. You can also do this with a raw reworked shot and that you saved in jpeg. Paint removes the exif file, and a 24 mpix picture at full size shrinks to 4.5 to 7 mb. Now, by the file size that remains, you can see how much information is really in the shot. The exif files take often between 12 and 18 mb of space. By removing this exif file, you will be able to send a full sized 24 mpix picture by e-mail as well.

I have it and love it, the 12-60 is fast as lighting and 50-200 SWD not far behind and the m75-300 is fast as lighting too. Amazing to see some of these remarks from a perspective of never even using one. This is a great camera, with great IQ and controls.

Using the compare-tool on the last page I don't understand, why Nikon D7100 has a relevant higher rating for Viewfinder/Screen.

Arguable E-M1 "only" has an EVF... which is not as snappy as a real VF - but also has some benefits. So imho not much points to gain here, since the new EVF has almost no lag and a really high resolution.

Moreover E-M1 EVF is larger, than the D7100 VF, Screen is articulated whilst fixed on the Nikon... where does the higher score come from?

Good, thorough review. I'd love to see how usable it is with longer 4/3 telephotos and specific lenses like the Panasonic/Leica 25mm 1.4. I liked the idea behind the EM5 but found it way too small for my hands, this would feel better. Part of the problem for Oly is that new consumers will look up the experience of previous owners and ask themselves: If I buy your new lenses will you abandon them like you did with 4/3? The brand's silence will be a negative point.

Inexplicable scoring.Dpreview's own partner DXOmARK has Nex 7 (just about to be replaced) significantly better then EM5 on every score.Sure the Olympus sensor (now they are using sony) is better then previous versions, but the quality of picture is still far behind APS-c. I know, after editing both, the Nex pictures take far more battering in pp.It is simply misleading to say otherwise

2) Surely there is more to a camera than just a sensor? Ergonomics, viewfinder, weatherproofing (and level of weatherproofing), focus speed, continuous shot speed, native lenses, stabilization, etc. Sony does some neat stuff, and in some ways their cameras push boundaries, but in other ways they're playing catch-up.

I do like the implications of what harold is saying. So DPReview are misleading the public... but why? Bribes are involved? The owner is an Oly fanboy? A great internet-wide anti-Sony conspiracy of some sort?

Harold - you don't know what you are talking about. I have both the E-M5 and the Fuji X-E1 (and X100 too), both great cameras with excellent image quality. The Fuji may get the edge, but that is it. There is NO significant difference between the two in "real life" shooting. A photographer can be happy with either one.

Wow, m4/3 format sensor, 500gm weight and a $1400 body only price ! Now wonder they are going bankrupt. I agree this is a great camera for what it is and especially weather-sealed, but this is not competitive in the market for that price range. Even more so as Sony A7 is weather sealed and comes at just $300 more with a FF sensor.

Thing is unless you use Zeiss lenses on that Nikon the sensor of the Nikon isn't really going to beat that in the Olympus. Because the best Olympus lenses easily beat the best Nikon lenses for optical quality.

Yet again: DXO sensor scoring is next to useless because it doesn't account for the lens used and the incamera processing.

The A7 will release with literally, barebones glass. You have to adapt everything. The EM1 is a faster camera all around. It's also signifigantly more quiet; and having owned and used Nex's and spent a great deal of money on them; not a single one, new or old, can compete with the OMD for sheer camera performance.

What you get with the Sony's will be absolute IQ over absolute performance wheras the OMD is absolute performance (relative to the Sony) over absolute IQ.

Also, you're looking at much bigger/heavier glass overall. Also, weather sealing, as far as I know, do not come with the lower FF cameras. You have to pay for it.

I own an EM1 with the 12-40 f2.8. The overall performance of the camera alone makes the asking price a bargain.

Do an analysis of what you get with the EM1 in that price bracket; I doubt you'll find anything comparable and even if you do, it's going to lose out to the EM1 in some fashion.

HowaboutRaw, "Of course that's the wrong approach." Of course. As an example look at the dark round spot on X:760-800 Y:172-212. Enhance contrast to 90% to make it easier to see in the cloudy sky's top left corner.

The A7 has LED viewfinder with slightly more resolution with slightly less magnification. Weather-sealing and AF performance is something that I can't comment as A7 is not available for public yet.

Faster flash sync and IBIS are advantages for Em1. I don't think Sony released the buffer size specs of the A7 although given its much higher resolution, it probably will store less number of images. On the other hand, the much bigger sensor size, lower noise at higher ISO, Dynamic range, more control over DOF are in the favor of A7. A7 does have a lot of customizable buttons and options. So still I can't see how Em1 is pro and A7 is barebones. The advantages of Em-1 are really not that much.

Resolution of the EVF is the same: 2.36 million pixels, only make and magnification differ.

Weather sealing is open to debate (though watch the camera store review for clues), but AF isn't. A7r is even slower because of the lack of PDAF.

But the buffer and continuous shooting are things that make A7(r) "barebone" because pro-level FF cameras don't skip on that detail. And you pay for that luxury.

Yes, A7 has buttons and customization, like many other cameras, but EM1 just has loads of it.

DOF control is a double-edged sword. Having more control is an advantage, but in RL situations, you will often find yourself stopping down because your FF lens has better IQ that way and/or it's easier to nail the focus (not every1 wants to have one eye in focus and everything else out of focus). The lenses often excell wide open already and DOF is not as shallow so shooting wide open also allows you to shoot at faster shutter speeds/lower ISOs. IBIS helps here too.

With Samsung, Sony and Toshiba selling 4K TVs for under 4000 dollars already, the image quality offered by these small sensor cameras is visibly lacking. And dpReview's denial of the obvious double edges produced by shuttershock shown in their own samples is not going to help.

Ultra HD displays of 3840x2160 show almost the full width of 4608x3456 pixel images. Noise and shutter shock displayed in the EM1 images even at base ISO become immediately evident.

Olypan, I like your dedication to Olympus. They have wonderful colours, a full frame camera from them would be great, global shutter, z-axis sensor focusing and light. Sony is planning it for 2015, Olympus could be first. It will be a hit and leading the way.

If it were APS-C or FF, the lenses would be larger and heavier. Beginning with the E-M5, many of us have decided that m4/3 provides the optimal combination of IQ and size. I don't feel the need to go on threads about APS-C or FF cameras and criticize them for having larger and heavier lenses, and fail to understand why some people feel the need to criticize m4/3.

Back in the day, I had an extensive OM-1 system with multiple bodies and a full suite of lenses, all of which I sold some time ago. Since then, I have had several digital cameras. Currently, I am shooting with a Canon G1X, which is really the first digital camera I have been satisfied with due to its large sensor. However, I am thinking about moving to a more versatile DSLR, either jumping up sensor size-wise to a full frame Nikon, or down sensor size-wise to a OM-D M1.

The main issue for me is lens availability and selection, about which I am confused. Can someone explain to me which Olympus and Panasonic lenses I can use without the MMF-3 adapter, and which lenses require the adapter. Thanks.

One of the main drawbacks of the E-M5 is image playback, because the playback button is very difficult to press, and once you pressed it the image only appeares in the LCD, but never in the viewfinder.

Is the E-M1 capable of displaying the image review in the viewfinder when you press the image playback button?

And is it possible to customze any other button besides the playback button for image review?

As you can see from the descriptions of button customisation in our Controls page, you can't assign any other button for playback. But the E-M1's play button is much less inconveniently placed than the E-M5's.

The new playback button in fact seems easier to press (than on the E-M5) but at the same time more difficult to reach without a little hand acrobatics (just an assumption from what I see), specially when one is looking through the viewfinder.

One of the two new customizable buttons in the front of the camera would have been nicer for (optional) image playback, as it was implemented on the Nikon D800.

From my perspective it's not silly. I have intensively used the E-M5 for over a year now, and having shot ten thousands of images with it I can tell the image review button and behaviour were actually very awkward in real use, it's a thing that can slow down your shooting.

Having invested some money on glas for this system I have a real interest in a new body with enhancements where the E-M5 was lacking. The image review is one of the aspects where a mirrorless system is (or should be) in natural advantage over a DSLR - but only if the workflow is seamless. The placement of the review button is critical here.

I also own a Nikon system, and although you have to switch your eye from the EVF to the LCD to review an image, the process of image review takes me less time with the D800 than with the E-M5 - just because of the button placement.

"Its Four Thirds sensor is smaller than the APS-C imagers of its Nikon D7100 and Canon EOS 70D peers, but we think the difference it makes in real world shooting is hard to spot. You need to put the E-M1 up against a full frame camera to really see a significant difference in image quality."

If the Space Needle shot is any indication, the D7100 thoroughly trounces this good offering from Olympus for subjects wanting lots of intricate detail. It's by no means a difficult call. The bar has been raised and the price of admission lowered.

Why didn't you test the focusing performance in a more relevant scenario - where you use a tele zoom lens of 200 or 300mm length and not those piddly wide angle lenses? A big fail to put the finger on the sore wound that is focusing performance of this camera when challenged!

Classic. Similar mistake was done by plenty of reviewers for Nikon 1 - where they tried to test AF and concluded its brilliant only forgetting that depth of field reaches everywhere from 10 meters in front of target to 20 meters behind it. o_O

I was waiting for DPReview to do a full review of the GX7, but I suspect it will be very similar to this review. It looks like Olympus has adopted some of the in-camera features that the GX7 has, such as the color tool and intervalometer.

I've been shooting with a GX7 for a week or so now. It's low-light capabilities have surprised me. The starlight photos are, well, stellar! With shutter set to 60 seconds with the F1.4 lens, I can capture thousands (millions?) of stars in the backdrop of a sharply-focused tree or un-lit building(although the stars appear slightly blurry due to earth's rotation during the 60 seconds - at least they all blur in the same direction!). It even captures stars when there are bright landscape lights on the horizon.

Of course, shorter shutter speeds reduce star movement, but don't quite capture the depth that a million or so stars can create.

Number of stars visible to a human eye under perfect conditions is about 2000.

The challenge with night photography is to capture the starry night w/o trails and blur. A fast 35mm-equivalent F/1.4 35mm, or F/2.8 14mm, can do the trick. Exposure should be less than 30s, dep. on the focal length.

falconeyes - in defense of the OP, keep in mind that once you have a camera set up for longer exposure (30-60 seconds), you will pick up a lot more stars than you would see with the naked eye. That is a fact.

“The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.” ― Dorothea Lange, American documentary photographer and photojournalist

If this camera allows people same that aim Dorothea talks about, then it is a perfect camera for all those who find it sufficing and made for their taste, and I can see, many can. I wouldn't mind either.

Everything else, like 80% of nonsense in these comments, is irrelevant.

After about 2 years of carrying around m43 cameras and lenses I can't go back to larger DSLRs. I stuff my m43 and 2 lenses in the small back pocket for a hiking trip and I don't even notice it. What's worse is when you have small kids with baby bottles, clothes, extra food, and still need to carry a camera. M43 is a blessing. Image quality is really good enough for the majority of shooters.

who cares indeed ... but I just wonder is there a camera with more ridiculous code name .. OK ... lets repeat... OM D E M1 ... well bad, bad starting point Olympus ! Why don't you call it simply DeLorean DMC-12 ... from the Back to the Future film trilogy. It looks exactly the same as the car of that time !

BBking83 - I'm with you up until the "1" bit. I don't get that. Why did my EM-5 start at "5" and not "1" surely someone in marketing, way back when, could spot the numbering anomaly? If EM-5 had been "1" then this camera could have been "2"

I really amazes me that people would buy, or consider buying, a camera of this sophistication (in the good sense) and then shooting JPEGs! The CA/defringing capacity of most RAW converters surely makes these problems a minor consideration. Flare's another matter of course.

And if the camera (any camera actually) can produce excellent OOC Jpegs why not use it? Using in camera software vs software on a PC; does it really matter which one you use if it produces the desired results? Software is software; doesn't really matter where it physically resides.

I notice that we no longer get comprehensive examples of the menu system UI in your reviews. It sounds like Olympus has made no progress simplifying camera configuration. That was the worst aspect of the E-M5, and the UI doesn't get much more friendly with familiarity. Finding and changing infrequently used settings is annoying with the complex and sometimes obtuse Olympus UI. It's also too bad that with a little extra bulk, Olympus didn't include a fully articulating display. Nice cameras.

Yes indeed. Even after more than a year of continuous use I manage to blunder into unwanted VF modes and struggle to escape, not helped by the tiny buttons and a control layout that never becomes second nature. God help anyone for whom this is their first "proper" camera.

Is there a mistake at ISO 6400 on the daylight studio shot? Up to ISO 3200 compared to the E-M5 and E-P5 the E-M1 is almost identical. Then at 6400 the E-M1 is very smudgy compared to the other 2. At 12800 they're comparable again. The problem doesn't seem to occur in the low light studio shots at ISO 6400 so it shouldn't be the camera at fault.

Thank you for a very comprehensive review delivered extremely quickly! Sorry to point out 1 (very minor!) point, on the wi-fi page, where next to the screen shot of the app you say:"• Remote Control - operate the camera from your phone or tablet. The mode is limited to iAuto only, but you can specify your desired focus point and set a self timer."But later on down the page it's clear this mode works in PASM modes too. Did you copy that bit from the E-P5 Review? :-)

I have tried this camera during the launch more than a month ago and found the tracking focus not really up to my expectation. I need an independant confirmation whether I am right or wrong. It would be good if DPR or someone out there can shoot a bird flying across the frame or a motorbike zooming across. I know I would be able to do it with my Canon 1DX and the EF 400 mm f/2.8L IS.

Seriously. You're asking a $1400 camera to meet or surpass the $12,000 combo of 1DX and 400 F/2.8L lens. If it can't do it, it must be TRASH, right? If it gets 80% there, I would regard the E-M1 as a huge WINNER.

Guys, "objective, quantitative" means repeatable (by other reviewers too) and expressed as an easy to understand number, for the topic it would be "well-focused frames per second" on a controlled subject with controlled speed, trajectory and level of light (both daylight level and gym level are interesting, especially the latter). Not just some bird or some bike in some unique circumstances which would never be exactly repeated to compare with other cameras.

IMO a bit dissapointed to see that the continuous AF section of the review is completely pulled from an Olympus press event shooting white riders on top of white horses. Would have liked to see the extra effort towards continuous AF. I mean its an Olympus press even showcasing the EM-1...in a way the shooting environment is controlled by Olympus.

"True, you can switch out a heavy zoom for a lightweight prime on a DSLR and get something of the same feeling, but the DSLR doesn't transition into the role of a take-me-anywhere camera quite like a Micro Four Thirds body does"

And yet somehow we do manage to take our DSLRs everywhere with us and certainly to the same places we'd take the almost-as-large as Canon SL1 E-M1. SL1 and 40mm pancake is actually lighter by 70g than E-M1 + 17 f1.8/20f1.7.

What you said might be true for the smaller PEN style bodies but E-M1 is getting seriously large and straying away from the small and compact concept. It's larger and heavier than Sony A7(R) twins!

The body is still only a third of the equation... A 10x super zoom on MFT is the size of a 3x kit zoom on a DSLR. Similarly, there's no comparison between f/2.8 zooms... If you're sticking with primes it might not matter much, but for a lot of others there's still a very tangible difference even with a body as large as the EM1...

It's not my preference either, though if I was made of money I'd certainly grab one. There's something appealing about a system that can scale from a GM1 to an EM1! I'm fairly new to it so I only have the one body at the moment, but I could seemyself with two in the future.

It's all about finding your own PERSONAL blend of size, weight, usability, IQ, etc. I have a friend (enthusiast, NOT professional) who takes two Canon bodies (1-full-frame, 1-APS), and a whole raft of L-lenses from 16mm to 400mm in a giant backpack wherever he goes. I take a Panny G3, two small zooms and a fast prime in a tiny shoulder bag to the same locations. Am I jealous of his equipment or his pictures? Absolutely not. I very much respect his ability as a photographer, but it has nothing to do with his equipment.

Olympus had outdone itself again. For micro 4/3 users, this is the best camera available right now. APSC and Full-Frame users need not to worry coz their IQ and DR would always be better due to their sensor size. I got this camera coz of its compatibility with the old 4/3 lenses I have and it's light weight and weather-sealed.

I can now use my growing set of m43rds primes, or my family of superb 43rds optics on the same camera. Brilliant.

What gets me is the connectivity and creative control in camera, the personalization of colour allowed in camera, the ability for me to fine tune, tweak and perfect my very own look from tone control to hue to saturation... in camera.

Why is the in camera so important to me... Because I sit in front of a computer all day for my work... the less I have to do for my photography the better.

It would be interesting for DPR to segregate such reviews into performance by photographic subject, e.g. sports/wedding/landscape/macro (etc) performance compared to competition. Comparing MILC v APS-C would be interesting in this format.

And Ford and GM outsell BMW and Mercedes. It always amazes me when people look at the sales figures as proof that something is better. I suppose it makes them feel 'safe' that they went with the same as everyone else instead of evaluating what is best for their needs.

Handled one briefly and must say the EVF is definitely a step up, FF vf sized with more fluid response than the GX7 or fuji's Xe. Continuous FPS is really fast too with a very light flutter and shutter sound seem even more damped compared to EM5. AF is blazingly fast which DPR failed to list in their pros. Its a camera or system that needs to be experienced as a whole to see it's benefits. For those who can't see pass its 'small' sensor size, your depth of view are as narrow as your FF or MF or LF systems.

More about gear in this article

Olympus has released a major firmware update for two of its OM-D cameras as well as the PEN-F. It adds support for Profoto's TTL flash system and also brings numerous new features and bug fixes. Read more

The new Olympus OM-D E-M1 II is quite a camera. Capable of shooting at up to 60fps at full-resolution, and packing high-bitrate 4K video and in-body stabilization, the E-M1 II is a powerhouse. But if you already have an E-M1, is it worth the upgrade? Find out

Olympus unveiled the details of two fairly significant firmware updates, both of which will be available for download, for free, come November. The flagship Olympus OM-D E-M1 will receive firmware version 4.0. while the not even one-year-old OM-D E-M5 II will receive firmware version 2.0. Read more

Olympus has announced that it is is producing a new limited edition 'Titanium' OM-D E-M5 II camera. The Titanium E-M5 II will offer all of the same features and specs of the regular version, with its top and bottom plates swapped out for dark metallic versions that match those of the OM-3/Ti from 1994. Worldwide, 7,000 copies of the Titanium model will be made, though how many will be available in the US is yet to be announced. The company is also readying firmware updates for both the E-M1 and E-M5 II, related mostly to underwater shooting. Read more

Latest in-depth reviews

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

The Edelkrone DollyONE is an app-controlled, motorized flat surface camera dolly. The FlexTILT Head 2 is a lightweight head that extends, tilts and pans. They aren't cheap, but when combined these two products provide easy camera mounting, re-positioning and movement either for video work or time lapse photography.

Are you searching for the best image quality in the smallest package? Well, the GR III has a modern 24MP APS-C sensor paired with an incredibly sharp lens and fits into a shirt pocket. But it's not without its caveats, so read our full review to get the low-down on Ricoh's powerful new compact.

The Olympus OM-D E-M1X is the ultimate sports, action and wildlife camera for professional Micro Four Thirds users. However, it can't quite match the level of AF reliability offered by its full frame competitors.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

We've updated our waterproof camera buying guide with the latest round of rugged compacts, and we've crowned a new winner as the best pick in the category: the Olympus TG-6. That is, unless you happen to find a good deal on the TG-5.

Researchers with the Samsung AI Center in Moscow and the Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology have created a system that transforms still images into talking portraits with as little as a single image.

K&R Photographics, a camera store in Crescent Springs, Kentucky, was robbed by armed men, who not only took thousands of dollars worth of camera equipment, but also injured the 70-year-old co-owner of the store.

The new Fujifilm GFX 100 boasts some impressive specifications, including 100MP, in-body stabilization and 4K video. But what's it like to shoot with? Senior Editor Barnaby Britton found out on a recent trip to Florence, Italy.

It's here! The long-awaited next-generation Fujifilm GFX has been officially launched. Click through to learn more about the camera that Fujifilm is hoping will shake up the pro photography market - the GFX100.

We've known about the Fujifilm GFX 100 since last fall, but now it's official: this 102MP medium-format monster will be available at the end of June for $10,000. In addition to its incredible resolution, the camera also has in-body IS, a hybrid AF system, 4K video and a removable EVF.

According to DJI, any drone model weighing over 250 grams will have AirSense Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers installed to help drone operators know when planes and helicopters are nearby.

Chris and Jordan are kicking off a new segment in which they make feature suggestions to manufacturers for the benefit of all photographer-kind. To start things off, they take a look at the humble USB-C port and everything it could be doing for us.

The Olympus TG-5 is one of our favorite waterproof cameras, and the company today introduced the TG-6, a relatively low-key update. New features include the addition of an anti-reflective coating on the sensor, a higher-res LCD, and more underwater and macro modes.

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

We've been playing around with a prototype of the new Peak Design Travel Tripod and are impressed so far: it's incredibly compact, fast to deploy and stable enough for the heaviest bodies. However, the price may turn some away.